Stepping out of the ranger world

[rusty ol ranger]

i wouldnt care if you were dropping a gtr engine in it and making it front wheel drive.....with riviera parts...

i have confidence in ya it will be bad ass and effective.







for a sunday a month 20 mile garage ornament... yeah...sure ...especially if it is a minty time capsule. i agree keeping it period in such a case...




if its something you want to build to use.... no way i would be heart broken when people use workable components.

especially a fe ford....why would you want a gas gobbling slobbering rope main engine in a dream cruiser? those ford engines in stock form sucked.... keep it motronic too? when spending coin on a full build though....they do have a glorious ring through the pipes....which makes oil drips easily forgivable. unless i had money to burn....cant waste money on a wheezed old engine when so much cool shit is available


a duramax would be ideal in any big block application. ridiculous power and economy. whether it is in a fairlane...suicide door lincoln or a chevelle...


then again....i like to drive my shit. FAR. if i had a old school 2.9 or sbf in my package....that wouldnt happen.



in this case.....big block power is a given....

You do realize those old "wheezer" ford engines had alot of untapped power in them right? Right i know you do.

Granted not as much as a duramax or whatever....but seriously for a street driven vehicle who needs that much? Unless youre competeing with it theres no sense.

A 400 (let alone a 460) can be built to run very well with not alot of effort.

All im saying is, if you want to drive something modern, buy something modern. Old trucks/ cars have a charm about them in stockish form that is irreplaceable. Cutting up and making old things modern does nothing but ruin the old stuff.

This is just my opinion. But any "old" vehicle built really since the late 60s (and even before back to the 50s even, but i dont have much experance there) are perfectly capable of being driven in semi stockish or stock form whereever you wanna go.

Because lets face it, most guys resto mod projects end up as little more then a summer cruiser as well.

This is no offense to anyone, just a subject im passionate about. I would never dream of hacking up any of my 70s stuff for EFI, modern suspension, and O/D. You rip the heart and what makes them cool/fun right out of them just to get a smoother idle and better mpg.

I dont get it.

 

[bobbywalter]

22 mpg in a 7500 pound crewcab cruising 70 mph.....


you dont get that?

 

[bobbywalter]

have you ever built a reliable 400 hp 400?


not easy. not today.

there is a guy that wants to revive his capri....he sent me a link that is this video below....as he would like me to handle the powertrain....like i did the first time 25 years ago...

he does not understand that i actually work 7 days a week 13-16 hrs a day...yet i am still building engines and working on shit in between typing my ridiculousness on this sight...he cant fanthom such a work schedule...all i hope is to make it home long enough to swap engines in a van...that my kids need for work... be nice to work on my bronco...

anyway...if this result is not understandable...then i am past the ability to comprehend such syncratics as ours...but this job done here sure flies in the face of the definition you give me..

 

[G8orFord]

Modern metallurgy, better lubricants, better ignition systems, better fuel delivery and overdrive transmissions are why most of today's engines have no problem seeing 200k or more with just regular maintenance. Getting 200k out of a 70's vintage SBC or SBF prior to a fairly major failure was rare. Back then, a 100k vehicle was pretty much considered used up. That's not the case in today's world.

An example: A modern engine coupled to an O/D trans, with a 3.73 rear end and a 30" tire is spinning about 900-1000 RPM less at 75 mph than that same combination with a 3 speed in 1975. That's roughly 30% fewer RPMs. That theoretically equates to 30% less engine wear, not to mention increased mpg in most cases.

I like old school stuff too, but for a daily, if you're rebuilding anyway, why not make it more efficient and dependable for the same basic money. If you're building a show car/truck or a weekend cruiser, then yeah, I can see keeping it original.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

22 mpg in a 7500 pound crewcab cruising 70 mph.....


you dont get that?

No i do. But if thats what you want buy a modern crew and leave the old stuff for people who will actually apperciate it.

Modern metallurgy, better lubricants, better ignition systems, better fuel delivery and overdrive transmissions are why most of today's engines have no problem seeing 200k or more with just regular maintenance. Getting 200k out of a 70's vintage SBC or SBF prior to a fairly major failure was rare. Back then, a 100k vehicle was pretty much considered used up. That's not the case in today's world.

An example: A modern engine coupled to an O/D trans, with a 3.73 rear end and a 30" tire is spinning about 900-1000 RPM less at 75 mph than that same combination with a 3 speed in 1975. That's roughly 30% fewer RPMs. That theoretically equates to 30% less engine wear, not to mention increased mpg in most cases.

I like old school stuff too, but for a daily, if you're rebuilding anyway, why not make it more efficient and dependable for the same basic money. If you're building a show car/truck or a weekend cruiser, then yeah, I can see keeping it original.

Ok then...once again. If you want to daily drive a classic then daily drive a classic. If you want something modern buy something modern.

Thats all im saying. Its like the guy who had a bugatti built on a 2000 cougar chassis. Sure it looks the same...but looks are only skin deep.

I also really, really, question the reliabilty myth. As in my experence, most every vehicle ive had (with a couple exceptions) built after 1979 have given me way more headaches then my older stuff.

Just my opinions. Not trying to argue.

As for the fox with coyote, its a cool build and i can apperciate that but at the same time why not just buy a damn coyote mustang?

 

[Uncle Gump]

@RangerFabWorks ...

Is it really that easy?

This Ranger stuff is in your DNA now...

 

[RangerFabWorks]

@RangerFabWorks ...

Is it really that easy?

This Ranger stuff is in your DNA now...

I’m sure I’ll get the itch to swap another 1st gen. The 2000 ranger will keep me and the wife content for now.

 

[Snoranger]

No i do. But if thats what you want buy a modern crew and leave the old stuff for people who will actually apperciate it.


Ok then...once again. If you want to daily drive a classic then daily drive a classic. If you want something modern buy something modern.

Thats all im saying. Its like the guy who had a bugatti built on a 2000 cougar chassis. Sure it looks the same...but looks are only skin deep.

I also really, really, question the reliabilty myth. As in my experence, most every vehicle ive had (with a couple exceptions) built after 1979 have given me way more headaches then my older stuff.

Just my opinions. Not trying to argue.

As for the fox with coyote, its a cool build and i can apperciate that but at the same time why not just buy a damn coyote mustang?

In my case, this was the last vehicle my Grandfather owned. It was the only thing he ever bought new. (He passed away in '87.)

He told me "Computers are the future of cars, learn everything you can about them... don't waste your time with carburetors, it's dead technology."

He spent his last few months in bed reading anything about EFI he could get his hands on... knowing full well he would never use any of that information.

If all goes as planned, this truck will get a 7.3 gasser in a few years when they start showing up in wrecks. I'm pretty sure he would be proud to see fuel injection in his truck.

I’m sure I’ll get the itch to swap another 1st gen. The 2000 ranger will keep me and the wife content for now.

You'll never get away from them. I tried, it doesn't work.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

In my case, this was the last vehicle my Grandfather owned. It was the only thing he ever bought new. (He passed away in '87.)

He told me "Computers are the future of cars, learn everything you can about them... don't waste your time with carburetors, it's dead technology."

He spent his last few months in bed reading anything about EFI he could get his hands on... knowing full well he would never use any of that information.

If all goes as planned, this truck will get a 7.3 gasser in a few years when they start showing up in wrecks. I'm pretty sure he would be proud to see fuel injection in his truck.






You'll never get away from them. I tried, it doesn't work.

In your case, personally, id pry run an 460 with some sort of aftermarket TBI.

I can understand the sentimental attachment as well, i dont know i just couldnt bring myself to do it.